Skip to comments.If You Want To Ban Guns, Just Say So
Posted on 06/15/2014 2:48:51 PM PDT by QT3.14
While answering a few questions on Tumblr this week, President Obama informed participants that our levels of gun violence are off the charts. He claimed that it was incomprehensible that congress hadnt reacted to overwhelming public opinion and passed legislation to expand gun background checks, adding that nations like Australia had long ago enacted sensible gun control laws to stop mass shootings:
(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...
But that standard didn't apply to ∅Care when there was overwhelming public opinion against it.
‘Rats and the left will never say exactly what they mean, but their actions give them away. They won’t say we want your guns, they just nibble everywhere to take them away. They won’t say they want one party total control government, they just allow criminaliens over the border to change the electorate, and fight voter ID. That’s but two examples... must be thousands.
More proof that the dumbass Kenyan doesn’t understand how the Bill of Rights work OR WHAT THEY MEAN!!! I’ve always said it was a dumbass idea to put an America-hating, non-American in the Oval Office.
As I visit blogs, read commentary, the internet news and even here on FR, it seems obama has good reason to want guns removed from the hands of free men and women, his reason, fear.
I suspect he understands fully what he is doing:
Inner party Democrapublicanese:
“We just need a little more control over guns, that’s all, ya da ya da ya da.” translated: “Excepting the military, police and our security, we just want all firearms confiscated, period.”
“Comprehensive immigration reform” = “Amnesty”
The appropriate response from the opposition party is:
“What you propose requires a change to the Constitution. If you wish to change the Constitution, propose an amendment and put it to a vote of Congress and the states as provided for in the Constitution.”
Instead what we get from the opposition party, just like on every other issue of importance is silence or acquiescence.
The problem they have is even if they do manage to bend the Constitution to their will, we still have the right to effectively defend ourselves against those more powerful, more numerous and less-principled than ourselves.
Not completely. Just from honest, law-abiding non-violent citizens. The seasoned, violent criminals would get to keep their illegal guns.
So that they can just take whatever they want from the ‘oppressors.’
Try to imagine the pickle we would all be in right now if we didn’t have guns. I shudder at the thought of what the govt would be doing to all of us.
The biggest lie there is the public opinion one
Ask those in Colorado how public opinion was at the recalls
Like just about everything from Obama, this is just another smoke screen to divert attention from the fact that pretty much everything he and his administration has touched over the last 5 1/2 years has turned into poo.
Obama and other politicians want to remove the guns from men for fear of them revolting and killing the politicians.
admit it and let rwii/cwii begin.
Just once, I’d like to have explained the functional relationship between background checks and a significant majority of the multiple injury and/or fatality shootings in public spaces that have occurred over the past several years.
“The problem they have is even if they do manage to bend the Constitution to their will, we still have the right to effectively defend ourselves against those more powerful, more numerous and less-principled than ourselves.”
The reason I suggest the Republicans push for a vote on an amendment is it will lose. Even Harry Reid would have a problem bullying a Democrat Senate to repeal the 2nd amendment. Pushing for a vote now would be an overwhelming defeat for the progressives and a strong signal to the Supreme Court.
The road we are going down today with respect to the second amendment is the road of incrementalism, the same road that has resulted in the institutionalization of gay marriage and will soon result in amnesty for illegals. Change one vote on the Supreme Court and we will get a SC opinion that says the 2nd Amendment applies only to the militia which will be defined by the Court as the military and federally sanctioned law enforcement agencies. This ruling will take away the right of individual citizens to bear arms. As soon as a Democrat progressive administration has a 5-4 Supreme Court ruling redefining the Second Amendment sales of guns to citizens will be banned by executive order as well as the sale of ammunition to citizens without a government permit.
If we don’t force the nation to affirm the founding fathers 2nd amendment now, through a formal vote on repeal, it will be lost when the Supreme Court moves to a progressive majority. Scalia and Kennedy may outlive Obama. They are unlikely to outlive 2 more years of Obama and 8 years of Hillary. Plus, even if the Republicans take the White House, there is no guarantee President Romney, Bush, or Christie won’t appoint another David Souter, John Paul Stevens, Harry Blackman, Earl Warren, or John Roberts to the Court.
Well, that was genuine public opinion opposing Osama-Scare. The supposed groundswell for UBC’s was manufactured poll-whoring. Manufactured poll-whoring gets a different level of scrutiny than genuine public sentiment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.